Live data from Hacker News

Julia, I Love You

r-bloggers.com

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: Julia, I Love You

#21
post #17
post #10

Possibly sexist question: Does giving a female name to a programming language increase the rate of its adoption? AFAIK, this is the only such language (perl was nearly named gloria, though!). Does anyone know the etymology of the name (julialang.org seems to be down, so I couldn't check there)? There are Julia sets but that's for the lastname of the mathematician Gaston Julia.

Ruby.

That was named after Perl.

Having said that, it'd be interesting to know how many people think "gem", "girl's name" or "derivative of Perl" when they first hear it.

Re: Julia, I Love You

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you have in mind? A microframework, like Flask or Sinatra? I like that idea. I'd have to real dive into the internal of something like Werkzeug before trying to help out. But the Julia language itself looks fairly straightforward. I just finished up building a microblogging framework using Flask, and I'd love to do the same with a lean MVC framework in Julia, particularly if you achieve anything close to C-li…

Exactly what I was thinking.. something small and light, but elegant (very much like Julia itself!). I have little experience in this area and have only built the most lightweight frameworks for myself, but if we start a git repo I'll be the first to dive in and start poking around. I think it would be a really cool project.

Please let me know if you put up a git repo. I can't promise that I'll be able to make any significant contributions at this point in time (working on big project for the next few weeks), but I'd love to try to help when I do get some free time.

By the way, have you seen brubeck: http://brubeck.io/ It would be interesting to build this framework on top of Mongrel 2. Not saying we should necessarily try. But it could be fast, fast, fast.

Re: Julia, I Love You

#23
> "We want a language that’s homoiconic, with true macros like Lisp, but with obvious, familiar mathematical notation like Matlab."

I've thought having it both ways was an insurmountable barrier, and one had to sacrifice the ease-of-use of familiarity to the power of homoiconicity. I guess a resolution is to cheat, and have both sets of constructs (redundantly).

What's Julia's solution?

Re: Julia, I Love You

#24
post #10

Possibly sexist question: Does giving a female name to a programming language increase the rate of its adoption? AFAIK, this is the only such language (perl was nearly named gloria, though!). Does anyone know the etymology of the name (julialang.org seems to be down, so I couldn't check there)? There are Julia sets but that's for the lastname of the mathematician Gaston Julia.

I find it likely that the programming language was named after Mr. Julia as well.

Re: Julia, I Love You

#25
I'm admittedly a huge fan, but it's hard to find any downsides, even for such a young language. A couple of things you might notice if working in the REPL:

- There's no quick way to del/clear the current environment. Namespaces are planned but not yet implemented.

- If a function is redefined, there is no automatic recompilation of dependent functions. It's easy though to list or recall existing functions.

Give it a go. It's a lot of fun. Some of the core team have been invited to present at Lang.NEXT.

Re: Julia, I Love You

#26

I'm admittedly a huge fan, but it's hard to find any downsides, even for such a young language. A couple of things you might notice if working in the REPL: - There's no quick way to del/clear the current environment. Namespaces are planned but not yet implemented. - If a function is redefined, there is no automatic recompilation of dependent functions. It's easy though to list or recall existing functions. Give it a…

Depending on the extent of your plotting needs, Julia's grpahics/plotting capabilities will probably not be quite the same as something like gnuplot or ggplot2.

Further information:

https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/wiki/Graphics

https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/589

https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/314

Re: Julia, I Love You

#27
post #23

> " We want a language that’s homoiconic, with true macros like Lisp, but with obvious, familiar mathematical notation like Matlab. " I've thought having it both ways was an insurmountable barrier, and one had to sacrifice the ease-of-use of familiarity to the power of homoiconicity. I guess a resolution is to cheat, and have both sets of constructs (redundantly). What's Julia's solution?

Disclaimer: I don't know anything about Julia, except from reading a couple simple programs just now, and seeing that it uses syntax that looks somewhat like Algol.

I don't think there's any inherent contradiction between the two, depending on what you mean by "the power of homoiconicity" (1). Homoiconicity doesn't mean you need to use lists: you could make a language like C but with native structures to hold all of the syntax. It's just that "cons cell and symbol" happen to be a really simple set of tools from which you can build everything you need.

I suspect that languages that try to have both do it by sacrificing simplicity. They have syntax that looks like C, and then make it homoiconic by building essentially a DOM for all of that syntax. Perhaps the idea is that writing and reading "x = y + z" is deemed sufficiently common that they're OK with making metaprogramming more complex if they get to keep Algol syntax.

(1) By "depends on what you mean", I meant: is simplicity requisite for power? I would say "yes", but I can imagine there's someone who would say "no" and consider Algol-plus-DOM (is that what Julia is?) to be as powerful as simpler languages.

Re: Julia, I Love You

#28
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ruby.

That was named after Perl. Having said that, it'd be interesting to know how many people think "gem", "girl's name" or "derivative of Perl" when they first hear it.

Interestingly, the chat session where the name "ruby" was chosen has been saved for posterity: http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/... (and the HN discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2954764).

Re: Julia, I Love You

#29
post #3

I'm actually especially interested in taking the [web server]( https://github.com/chzyer/JuliaWebServer ) and building out a lean-and-mean MVC framework. Though it's designed as a scientific language, their goals of having C-like speed and yet Ruby-like beauty make it the perfect target for such a project. Anyone else interested in trying it out with me?

Have you considered building it on top of go? Or is it more of a "Julia seems cool I wonder if it's good for this" type idea? Just wondering, because I'm thinking of doing the same thing once I get familiar with the golang environment.

Re: Julia, I Love You

#30
I wanted to know how Julia compares to Python as a normal file-parser so I made this gist: https://gist.github.com/2280733

It seems that in this case, Julia is extremely slow compared to Python, probably because the LVVM stuff has to fire up first...

Any thoughts?

Edit: Submitted it on GitHub and it seems to be a genuine bug: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/661

Post reply on HN